<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"A western Pennsylvania trial court judge has quashed subpoenas issued by attorneys for<br /><br />suspended Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin in a criminal case against the jurist in which she is accused of using court staffers for political work.<br /><br />Allegheny County Common Pleas Court Judge Jeffrey A. Manning granted requests by the Allegheny County District Attorney&rsquo;s Office and the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts seeking to quash subpoenas issued by Orie Melvin&rsquo;s defense team in connection with the justice&rsquo;s preliminary hearing scheduled today before a magisterial district judge.<br /><br />In his memorandum opinion, a copy of which was provided to the <em>Pennsylvania Record</em>, Manning also simultaneously denied a motion for recusal that had been filed by Orie Melvin in which the justice requested the trial court recuse itself from the motions to quash.<br /><br />According to the opinion, Orie Melvin sought recusal because one of the subpoenas was issued to Kevin Sasinoski, an Allegheny County Common Pleas Court judge, and Sasinoski&rsquo;s wife, Lisa Sasinoski.<br /><br />Orie Melvin also sought recusal because she previously served on the western Pennsylvania trial court bench alongside Manning and others.<br /><br />&ldquo;Neither of these presents a valid reason for the Court to recuse from consideration of the Motion to Quash,&rdquo; Manning wrote, noting that neither Judge Sasinoski nor his wife are party to the proceeding.<br /><br />Manning wrote that it is incumbent upon one who asserts that a judge should be disqualified to produce some &ldquo;evidence of the necessity for that disqualification,&rdquo; and that that hasn&rsquo;t happened in this case.<br /><br />&ldquo;The defendant has pointed to no facts that would suggest that this Court is not capable of addressing the Matter pending before it in a manner consistent with the dictates of the Canons of Judicial Conduct,&rdquo; the opinion states.<br /><br />Manning also cited a judicial canon that states that the court addressing the motions would not &ldquo;undermine public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary.&rdquo;<br /><br />As for the motions to quash, they related to subpoenas Orie Melvin&rsquo;s lawyers had issued to various Pennsylvania court administrators, from the Superior Court to the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts.<br /><br />Superior Court administrators are apparently involved because some of the charges against Orie Melvin stem from her time as an appellate court judge on that bench.<br /><br />She stands accused of having used her then-Superior Court staff to work on her campaign for a seat on the high court, which she eventually won.<br /><br />Judges of all levels in Pennsylvania are elected.<br /><br />In granting the various motions to quash, Manning wrote that evidence that would be used to impeach the credibility of witnesses is not relevant at a preliminary hearing, and it appears from the &ldquo;broad and reaching scope of the request for production for documents&rdquo; attached to the subpoenas issued to the administrative employees and Justice Max Baer in particular that Orie Melvin is seeking impeachment evidence.<br /><br />&ldquo;The subpoenas represent the proverbial &lsquo;fishing expedition&rsquo; where the defendant hopes to locate, in this large volume of material, some evidence that might be helpful in presenting a defense to the charges,&rdquo; Manning wrote.<br /><br />Manning also wrote that nowhere does Orie Melvin offer any identification of the specific evidence or testimony that would be secured pursuant to the subpoenas that would &ldquo;negate any of the elements of the crimes charged.&rdquo;<br /><br />&ldquo;At best, the defendant suggests that there may be evidence relevant to negation of a prime facie case contained within the mountain of documents requested and/or that these witnesses might offer testimony negating a prime facie case,&rdquo; the ruling states. &ldquo;That is not enough.&rdquo;<br /><br />Manning also wrote that the court disagrees with the defense contention that the commonwealth doesn&rsquo;t have standing to challenge any of the subpoenas issued.<br /><br />&ldquo;The defendant offered as the only authority on this position a civil case,&rdquo; the ruling states. &ldquo;That case has no application here.&rdquo;<br /><br />Orie Melvin faces nine criminal counts, which were leveled by the Allegheny County District Attorney&rsquo;s Office.<br /><br />The justice remains suspended from her duties on the high court, leaving six members on the bench.<br /><br />In related news, the Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline will hold a hearing in mid August into whether Orie Melvin should continue to receive her pay pending the criminal trial.<br /><br />Orie Melvin&rsquo;s sister, former state Sen. Jane Orie, was recently convicted of similar corruption charges and subsequently sent to prison."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://pennrecord.com/stories/510552344-judge-overseeing-supreme-court-justice-orie-melvin-s-corruption-trial-quashes-defense-subpoenas>